<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Business &#38; Money &#124; TIME.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://business.time.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://business.time.com</link>
	<description>The latest news and commentary on the economy, the markets, and business</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 17:22:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='business.time.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://business.time.com/osd.xml" title="Business &#38; Money" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://business.time.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Sorry Paul Tudor Jones: It&#8217;s Male &#8212; Not Female &#8212; Traders We Should Be Worried About</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/sorry-paul-tudor-jones-its-male-not-female-traders-we-should-be-worried-about/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/sorry-paul-tudor-jones-its-male-not-female-traders-we-should-be-worried-about/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 17:21:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rana Foroohar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Paul Tudor Jones]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[traders]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80802</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Reading hedge fund giant Paul Tudor Jones’ recent comments that having babies makes women bad traders reminded me of a close friend of mine, a very senior investment banker at a major Wall Street firm, who once worked for someone she called “The Screamer.” I would regularly show up to lunches or dinners with my friend and hear stories about how The Screamer had shouted yet another round of expletives during a conference call, or thrown something at his secretary. I was always amazed that a man this emotionally unhinged had been allowed to hold any position of power, let alone one in which he was running billions of dollars of other people’s money. Which is why Jones’ comments are so fascinating, and so flawed. If I’m reading his rather convoluted argument correctly, he’s saying that women can’t be good traders because they are too much at the mercy of their emotions. Actually, plenty of research has shown just the opposite. In the bestselling book, The Hour Between Dog and Wolf, John Coates, a former trader who is now a neuroscientist at Cambridge University, looks at just how emotionally influenced traders – mainly men – are. Coates finds that fluctuations in traders’ hormones play a crucial and unexamined role in the financial markets, creating major boom and bust cycles as vast amounts of dopamine flood the brain during a good – or bad – trade. Indeed, it’s a snowballing cycle, as traders need ever-bigger doses of dopamine to feel the buzz. London Whale anyone? What’s interesting is that female traders don’t go as much to those extremes. Research shows they tend to be more risk adverse, yes, but that means that while they avoid the highs and lows, they can often have better returns than men. (MORE: Why We Need More Female Traders On Wall Street) I’m guessing that vast amounts of dopamine in the brain during a billion-dollar trade make you just as emotional as having a baby does. Maybe that’s one reason that regulators on both sides of the<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80802&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/sorry-paul-tudor-jones-its-male-not-female-traders-we-should-be-worried-about/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Curious Capitalist</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/curious-capitalist/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/wp136358329.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/wp136358329.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/wp136358329.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">A trader works on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange in New York, U.S., on Monday, Jan. 3, 2012.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/1c372315300738b8325eb1812b2ba263?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">ranaforoohar</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Big Gas Savings&#8217;: Kmart&#8217;s Funny Followup to the Viral &#8216;Ship My Pants&#8217; Ad</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/big-gas-savings-kmarts-funny-followup-to-the-viral-ship-my-pants-ad/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/big-gas-savings-kmarts-funny-followup-to-the-viral-ship-my-pants-ad/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 15:17:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Advertising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E-commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology & Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Big Gas Savings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gasoline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kmart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ship My Pants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[viral]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[viral ad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[viral marketing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80782</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Kmart surprised consumers everywhere recently with the &#8220;Ship My Pants&#8221; ad, a viral juvenile-humor hit viewed more than 17 million times on YouTube since being released in April. Now, the all-purpose discount retailer appears to have struck goofy gold yet again, with an online ad promoting Kmart&#8217;s &#8220;big gas savings.&#8221; Say either phrase quickly — &#8220;ship my pants,&#8221; &#8220;big gas savings&#8221; — and you get the joke. Each of these phrases is repeated and tweaked over and over in their respective ads. &#8220;Whoah, I just might ship my pants,&#8221; a woman says, upon hearing word from a Kmart sales staffer describing the retailer&#8217;s service that ships goods for free to customers who can&#8217;t find items them want in stores. &#8220;I just shipped my pants and it&#8217;s very convenient,&#8221; an older woman chimes in. As the variations on shipping one&#8217;s pants (and drawers and nighties and beds) continues on, as does the &#8220;Beavis and Butthead&#8221;-type giggling of viewers, presumably. (MORE: Does Kmart&#8217;s Hilarious New Ad Acknowledge That Kmart Stores Are Hopeless?) The &#8220;Ship My Pants&#8221; extended poop joke was such a hit—it quickly became one of the most-shared ads ever—it was probably inevitably that Kmart would follow up with another attempt at silly tongue-in-cheek humor. On Wednesday, Kmart did just that, releasing a &#8220;Big Gas Savings&#8221; ad on YouTube. This time, the ad promotes a 30¢ off per gallon gas deal at participating gas stations for customers who spend at least $50 at Kmart. The deal almost seems besides the point, however. The main point of the ad is to make people laugh … and think about Kmart more. &#8220;Sounds like you could use some big gas savings,&#8221; one woman says to another—who happens to be the mom featured in &#8220;Ship My Pants&#8221;—as they&#8217;re filling up at a gas station. &#8220;Thirty cents a gallon, that&#8217;s a big gas discount,&#8221; a bearded man says. &#8220;Dad, look at that big gas truck,&#8221; a boy (also from &#8220;Ship My Pants&#8221;) says, pointing to a gas tanker. And on and on. All along, of course,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80782&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/big-gas-savings-kmarts-funny-followup-to-the-viral-ship-my-pants-ad/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Advertising</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/marketing-2/advertising-marketing/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Drive for Free? Deals on Electric Cars Keep on Coming</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/drive-for-free-deals-on-electric-cars-keep-on-coming/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/drive-for-free-deals-on-electric-cars-keep-on-coming/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:00:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Autos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Green]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BMW]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electric car]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[electric vehicle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EV]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fisker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fisker Automotive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fisker Karma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[forTwo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nissan Leaf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plug-in]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SmartCar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SmartCar forTwo]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For many consumers, electric vehicle ownership has been a nonstarter for purely financial reasons. The math indicated that the money one saved in gas from an EV was usually outweighed by the car&#8217;s high initial price. But the math has been changing. The financial argument for buying an electric car is getting a lot more compelling lately, thanks to special lease deals from manufacturers and generous rebates and incentives from the federal government and certain states. One such state is Georgia, which gives an income tax credit of $5,000 for the purchase of an electric vehicle. Add in special lease deals from Nissan for its battery-powered Leaf and the federal tax credit of $7,500, and out-of-pocket costs for a two-year lease in Georgia come to a smidge over $2,000. The Wall Street Journal recently highlighted the case of one Georgia resident who did just that. Bronson Beisel traded in his SUV for a Leaf, and he figures the $200 per month he&#8217;s saving on gasoline more than makes up for the $2,000 or so the vehicle will cost him over the course of two years. Sure, there are electricity costs, but those are negligible, according to Beisel: &#8220;In March, I spent $14.94 to charge the car&#8221; and a bit less than that in April, he says. He also got an electric car-charging station installed at his house for no upfront cost. &#8220;It&#8217;s like a two-year test drive, free,&#8221; he says. (MORE: Tesla Beats the Odds &#8212; and the Haters &#8212; But Now Comes the Hard Part) The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that Nissan sold 200 Leafs in Georgia last December, which at the time was its best month ever in the state for sales. Nissan decreased the base price of the Leaf by $6,400 in early 2013, resulting in 2,236 units sold nationally in March, its best month ever. (March sales figures strictly for Georgia aren&#8217;t available right now.) Nissan is hardly the only automaker getting creative in its drive to make electric cars appeal to the mainstream. In order to<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80635&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/drive-for-free-deals-on-electric-cars-keep-on-coming/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Autos</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/autos-companies-industries/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. Durable Goods Orders Rise 3.3 Percent in April</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/us-durable-goods-orders-rise-3-3-percent-in-april/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/us-durable-goods-orders-rise-3-3-percent-in-april/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 12:49:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AP / Martin Crutsinger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Manufacturing]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80775</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(WASHINGTON) —  U.S. orders for long-lasting manufactured goods rebounded in April, buoyed by more demand for aircraft and stronger business investment. The gains suggest economic growth may be holding steady this spring. Orders for durable goods, items expected to last at least three years, rose 3.3 percent last month from March, the Commerce Department said Friday. That followed a 5.9 decline in March. A measure of business investment plans increased 1.2 percent. And the government revised the March figure to show a 0.9 percent gain, instead of a slight decrease. Companies ordered more machinery and electronic products last month, typically signs of confidence. More spending by businesses could ease fears that manufacturing could drag on the economy later this year. Factories had been seeing fewer orders at the start of the year, in part because slower global growth had reduced demand for U.S. exports. Economists had also worried that across-the-board federal spending cuts and higher taxes might prompt businesses to cut back on orders. Paul Ashworth, an economist with Capital Economics, said the April report suggests economic growth is holding up. He predicts growth in the April-June quarter will be at a rate of 2 percent to 2.5 percent. That&#8217;s not much lower than the 2.5 percent rate reported for the January-March quarter. Still, the payoff from the pickup in business investment may not come until the end of the quarter. That&#8217;s because the government looks at shipments when it measures the gross domestic product, not orders. And shipments of goods that signal investment plans fell in April, reflecting weaker demand at the start of the year. &#8220;Business investment appears to have started the second quarter on a weak note but should rebound over the final two months of the quarter,&#8221; he said. The April increase pushed total orders to $222.6 billion on a seasonally adjusted basis. That is 6.5 percent above the level of a year ago. Orders for transportation goods gained 8.1 percent, reflecting a 16.1 percent jump in demand for commercial aircraft and a 53.3 percent increase in<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80775&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/us-durable-goods-orders-rise-3-3-percent-in-april/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Manufacturing</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/manufacturing-companies-industries/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cbef58d71daefb9ddab6c6b20018290c?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">timeassociatedpress</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Money Talking: Where&#8217;s the Economy Headed This Summer?</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/money-talking-wheres-the-economy-headed-this-summer/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/money-talking-wheres-the-economy-headed-this-summer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 12:40:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rana Foroohar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Curious Capitalist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Podcast]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80752</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is the U.S. back? That&#8217;s the big question in the global economy right now. Earlier this week, Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke suggested that he&#8217;d be tiptoeing away from the Fed&#8217;s asset buying program, perhaps as early as the fall, since the U.S. economy was showing signs of recovery. That news, along with weaker than expected Chinese growth data, helped send Japan&#8217;s Nikkei stock market index crashing. Ironically, the weakness of the U.S. economy over the last several years is one reason that asset prices have stayed high, since central bankers have been buying up bonds and other lower risk assets, and pushing other investors into risker categories like stocks, buoying prices. Now, everyone is waiting to see how the Fed&#8217;s exit from &#8220;quantitative easing&#8221; is going to play out. This week, on WNYC&#8217;s Money Talking, BlackRock Investment Institute senior director Peter Fisher and I discussed the implications of the Fed&#8217;s exit, and what&#8217;s really happening with consumers and companies in the real economy. According to Fisher, the jury is still out about whether the Fed will be able to pull back from it&#8217;s asset buying program without a major market correction. But the bigger issue is wages — at some point, in an economy that&#8217;s made up of 70% consumer spending, you&#8217;ve got to have wage growth to have a real recovery. Next week we&#8217;ll get some big news on that score, with the University of Michigan consumer confidence numbers out. For more on where the markets and the real economy are going, listen in on this week&#8217;s episode of Money Talking.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80752&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/money-talking-wheres-the-economy-headed-this-summer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/audio.wnyc.org/moneytalking/moneytalking20130524pod.mp3" length="0" type="audio/mpeg" />
	<primary_category>Podcast</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/podcast-2/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/1c372315300738b8325eb1812b2ba263?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">ranaforoohar</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/audio.wnyc.org/moneytalking/moneytalking20130524pod.mp3" medium="audio">
			<media:player url="http://business.time.com/wp-content/plugins/audio-player/player.swf?soundFile=http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/audio.wnyc.org/moneytalking/moneytalking20130524pod.mp3" />
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Google Faces Fresh U.S. Scrutiny Over Market Power</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/google-faces-fresh-federal-scrutiny-over-display-ad-power/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/google-faces-fresh-federal-scrutiny-over-display-ad-power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 11:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Tech Policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80740</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Google just can&#8217;t seem to keep &#8220;the man&#8221; off its back. It&#8217;s only been a few months since Google walked away from a multi-year federal antitrust investigation into its search practices, with the legal equivalent of a slap on the wrist. Now, Google is said to be facing another antitrust probe, this time into its dominant position in the market for online display advertising. The Federal Trade Commission has launched a preliminary inquiry into whether Google is unfairly using its display ad market power to curb competition and push companies toward using its other products and services, according to multiple reports. The new FTC inquiry, which is in its early stages and may not result in a formal probe, is focused on Google&#8217;s giant DoubleClick unit, which the search giant purchased in 2008 for $3.1 billion. DoubleClick offers marketers and publishers tools to help them place and track display and video ads. Google&#8217;s YouTube video service is also a major force in display advertising. In the first quarter of 2013, Google accounted for 24.1% of the display ad market, up three points from a year earlier, according to data from market reach firm IDC. Yahoo! and Facebook accounted for 9.9% and 9.2%, respectively. (MORE: What Google’s FTC Deal Means for the Patent Wars) Google&#8217;s text-based search ads are well known to consumers because they are present on most Google search result pages. But the company also has number of advertising products that aren&#8217;t consumer-facing, but are designed for online marketers and publishers. These include the DoubleClick Ad Exchange, which is an advertising marketplace that generates revenue for Google, as well as DoubleClick for Publishers, which allows websites to track ad performance. If Google is using its market power to push companies to use these or other company products &#8212; or is bundling its products together in a practice known as &#8220;tying&#8221; &#8212; Google could run afoul of federal antirust laws. Google&#8217;s DoubleClick purchase was controversial, and was subject to a lengthy FTC review that concluded in December of 2007, paving the way for the deal. Ultimately,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80740&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/24/google-faces-fresh-federal-scrutiny-over-display-ad-power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Tech Policy</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/tech-policy/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3c7s7.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3c7s7.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/rtr3c7s7.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Google signage seen at the company&#039;s headquarters in New York.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lyft-Off: Car-Sharing Start-Up Raises $60 Million Led by Andreessen Horowitz</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/lyft-off-car-sharing-startup-raises-60-million-led-by-andreessen-horowitz/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/lyft-off-car-sharing-startup-raises-60-million-led-by-andreessen-horowitz/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 17:28:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Venture Capital]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80655</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Popular car-sharing start-up Lyft has raised $60 million in a major new round of funding led by Andreessen Horowitz, the influential Silicon Valley venture-capital firm started by Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen. The new funding comes as the ride-sharing market is exploding, with upstart firms like Lyft, Uber and SideCar leveraging smartphone technology to provide alternatives to traditional transportation options like taxicabs and rental cars. These services are examples of the emerging &#8220;peer to peer&#8221; economy &#8212; including Airbnb for lodging and TaskRabbit for everyday chores &#8212; in which people connect online to exchange services and get things done. Andreessen Horowitz&#8217;s investment in Lyft is a major boost for the fast-growing San Francisco–based start-up. &#8220;Andreessen Horowitz is ideal for us because they&#8217;ve built big businesses,&#8221; Lyft co-founder John Zimmer told TIME in an interview. &#8220;They&#8217;re very accomplished operators and they understand how to scale a business.&#8221; Founded in 2007, Andreessen Horowitz has quickly become a Silicon Valley powerhouse with $2.7 billion under management. The firm has invested in Facebook, Twitter, Groupon and Instagram, among dozens of other start-ups. (MORE: Lyft: Ride-Sharing Start-Up Zimride Hits the Gas Pedal in San Francisco) Since its launch last summer, Lyft has exploded in popularity. The company now facilitates over 30,000 rides per week in the four cities where it operates: San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle and Chicago. The company has hundreds of drivers, and in San Francisco alone, it has doubled the number of drivers over the past few months to keep up with demand. Lyft says that in each new city, the service has grown faster than the previous launch. In other words, Lyft is poised for liftoff. Lyft is a mobile-phone application — available on Apple’s iPhone and Google&#8217;s Android devices — that allows riders to “order” a driver to their location in minutes. Lyft makes money by taking a cut of the &#8220;fare&#8221; (technically a donation). Lyft&#8217;s drivers are regular people with cars who want to make a few bucks by giving someone a ride. All drivers are subjected to DMV and criminal-background checks and are required to undergo<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80655&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/lyft-off-car-sharing-startup-raises-60-million-led-by-andreessen-horowitz/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Venture Capital</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/technology-media/venture-capital/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr37sb0.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr37sb0.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr37sb0.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">John Zimmer of Lyft speaks at TechCrunch Disrupt SF 2012 in San Francisco</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Japan Market Crash: A Slow Leak in the &#8220;Central Bank Bubble&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/japan-market-crash-a-slow-leak-in-the-central-bank-bubble/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/japan-market-crash-a-slow-leak-in-the-central-bank-bubble/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 16:51:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Rana Foroohar</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Curious Capitalist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy & Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80719</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There’s a truism in investing that the last one into a market is the first one out. And that certainly seems to be the case today, with Japan’s Nikkei index crashing off the back of two things: First, hints from the Federal Reserve that the U.S. economy is improving enough to justify a slow pull-back from the central bank&#8217;s market-goosing asset buying program known as “quantitative easing;” and second, that the Chinese economy is slowing down even more than we thought. For some time now, I’ve been writing that the global equity markets have been inflated by central banks &#8212; and that this was a bubble that would eventually pop once people realized that monetary policy, rather than the real economy, was behind the boom. (MORE: The Next Real Estate Bubble Has Already Begun (But It’s Not What You Think)) Well, folks, that time may be here. Behavioral economist Peter Atwater, whose firm Financial Insyghts focuses on the market implications of consumer sentiment, certainly thinks so. “I would offer that Abenomics&#8221; &#8212; i.e. Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe’s plan to goose his nation&#8217;s economy with a combination of monetary policy and fiscal and structural reforms &#8212; &#8220;was the &#8216;subprime&#8217; of policy-making,” says Atwater. It’s a useful analogy: Subprime loans were the top of a real estate bubble that had been building for years in the U.S., and Japan’s version of quantitative easing is coming at the end of three years of money dumps by the U.S. Federal Reserve, each of which has had a smaller effect on the markets than those that came before. Sounds like a bubble to me. So, where do we go from here? Atwater and other folks like the smart guys at Capital Economics in London believe that the Nikkei will continue to be vulnerable and that Japan’s attempts to lower the value of it’s currency in order to boost exports and real economic activity may be at an end. In fact, you might even see the yen start to rise, especially if there’s another crisis in<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80719&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/japan-market-crash-a-slow-leak-in-the-central-bank-bubble/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Curious Capitalist</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/curious-capitalist/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/1c372315300738b8325eb1812b2ba263?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">ranaforoohar</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Get a Job Offer from a Stranger</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/get-a-job-offer-from-a-stranger/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/get-a-job-offer-from-a-stranger/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:30:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Harvard Business Review</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Management & Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Management Tip of the Day]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80646</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A good network is important when searching for a job. But if you don&#8217;t already know the right people, you need to expand your reach. People you don’t know yet can be just as helpful as those you do. Here’s how: Define your professional goals. Write down your objectives and make sure you can tell a cohesive story about yourself and where you’re headed. Cast a wide but focused net. Scour LinkedIn, company websites, and Twitter to identify people who may be able to offer you a job in your chosen field, or advice on how to get one. With this cold call approach, you’re not likely to get a high response rate so don’t be afraid to compile a long list. Tell a personal story. Write an email to each person making it clear who you are, what you’re interested in, and why he or she should respond and help you. Adapted from “Make a Stranger Believe in You” by Anne Kreamer. Visit Harvard Business Review&#8217;s Management Tip homepage Purchase the HBR Management Tips book<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80646&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/get-a-job-offer-from-a-stranger/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Management Tip of the Day</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/management-leadership/management-tip-of-the-day/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/b606f8263b1d0afd986d06c4fcef2352?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F2.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">timeharvardbusinessreview</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/hbr-web-logo.jpg?w=140" medium="image" />
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Photo Shoot Your Way to Sales Growth</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/photo-shoot-your-way-to-sales-growth/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/photo-shoot-your-way-to-sales-growth/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 15:00:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Lauren Simonds</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Small Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Small Business Tip of the Day]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80585</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The way you visually represent your company can affect your sales growth. We look at how using original photography makes a big difference in your bottom line. If you want to differentiate your business from your competition, then look no further than the images on your company website. Stock photography litters the Internet, and often the same generic models-as-business-people smile out from competing businesses. In theory, saving money on stock photography seems logical, especially for cash-strapped SMBs. And while studies show that websites with photos of happy people can do wonders for a company&#8217;s bad reputation, stock photography is a short-term fix that doesn’t yield any ROI. According to an article by Joe Taylor at Small Business Computing, investing in high-quality, professional photographs—of staff and of products—can drive business, boost sales conversions and help you stand out in a competitive field. These tips show you how. (MORE: Banking on Business Growth) Authentic Images Build Trust and Rapport Web-usability expert Jakob Nielsen and professional photographer Alina Vincent agree. People respond better to pictures of real employees on websites. People tend to ignore website images that don’t ring true, and instead will spend about 10 percent more time looking at company photos of real employees. It&#8217;s not surprising that a photographer would recommend a professional photo shoot, but Vincent posits that photos of your real employees will help you build a stronger rapport with potential customers. Go beyond the staid headshot; include a variety of images and settings that you can use on websites, catalogs, ads, billboards and brochures. Pro Shots Drive Business Perhaps your business deals more with products than with services. If so, high-quality product shots are essential if you want to increase sales conversions. Karen Lee, an expert on Etsy, says the quality of your product shots can mean the difference between business success and failure. She recommends shooting with indirect light and taking the time to consider each shot—including appropriate backdrops and props. The goal is to reveal the story behind each item and help it evoke a<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80585&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/photo-shoot-your-way-to-sales-growth/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Small Business Tip of the Day</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/small-business/small-business-tip-of-the-day/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/e9ca0c562f01f86bd5317f616a6ed4c6?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F2.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">itbeeditorial</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Consumer Psychology Behind Warby Parker&#8217;s $95 Pricing for Eyeglasses</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/the-consumer-psychology-behind-warby-parkers-95-pricing-for-eyeglasses/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/the-consumer-psychology-behind-warby-parkers-95-pricing-for-eyeglasses/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 14:00:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Knowledge@Wharton</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breakthrough]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[E-commerce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entrepreneurship]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Giving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Start-Ups]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[charity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eyeglasses]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[online shopping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pricing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pricing strategies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walmart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Warby Parker]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80617</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80617&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/the-consumer-psychology-behind-warby-parkers-95-pricing-for-eyeglasses/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>E-commerce</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/e-commerce-companies-industries/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/44310a1af940f994952d1e4db73096cd?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F1.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">TIME.com</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/kw_125x50.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">K@W_125x50</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>US Unemployment Aid Applications Fall to 340K</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/us-unemployment-aid-applications-fall-to-340k/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/us-unemployment-aid-applications-fall-to-340k/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 12:37:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AP / Paul Wiseman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80708</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[(WASHINGTON) — The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits fell by 23,000 last week, further evidence that the job market is slowly returning to health. Applications for unemployment aid declined to a seasonally adjusted 340,000 in the week ending May 18, the Labor Department said Thursday. That&#8217;s down from 363,000 the previous week and a level consistent with solid job gains. The less volatile four-week average ticked down just 500 to 339,500. That&#8217;s close to the five-year low of 338,000 reached during the first week of May. The four-week average is 9 percent lower than in November. &#8220;The underlying story in jobless claims continues to be one of gradual improvement,&#8221; Bricklin Dwyer, an economist at BNP Paribas, wrote in a research report. Unemployment claims are a proxy for layoffs. The decline in claims has coincided with steady job growth over the past six months. Since November, employers have added an average 208,000 jobs a month. That&#8217;s up from just 138,000 jobs a month during the previous six months. Still, much of the improvement has come from fewer layoffs, not robust hiring. Employers laid off just 1.7 million workers in March, only slightly above the 12-year low reached in January. Overall hiring, however, remains far below pre-recession levels. More than 4.7 million Americans were receiving unemployment benefits the week that ended May 4, down 23 percent from nearly 6.2 million a year earlier. The United States still has 2.6 million fewer jobs than it did when the recession began in December 2007. The unemployment has fallen to a four-year low of 7.5 percent, down from 10 percent in October 2009. Some of the decrease is because many people have given up looking for work. The government counts people as unemployed only if they are actively searching for a job. For hiring to strengthen enough to lower the unemployment rate to a more normal level of between 5.5 percent and 6 percent, companies must gain more confidence in the economy. But some may be hesitant to add workers because of concerns of<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80708&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/us-unemployment-aid-applications-fall-to-340k/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Economy</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/economy-policy/economy/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cbef58d71daefb9ddab6c6b20018290c?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">timeassociatedpress</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Loser&#8217; No More: Tesla Repays $465 Million U.S. Loan</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/loser-no-more-tesla-repays-465-million-u-s-loan/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/loser-no-more-tesla-repays-465-million-u-s-loan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 12:00:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sam Gustin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Autos]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80649</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tesla Motors has done right by U.S. taxpayers. The fast-growing electric car company has repaid the entire $465 million loan it received from the U.S. Department of Energy, in a vindication for company co-founder Elon Musk, the billionaire mogul and rocket-ship enthusiast. The loan repayment, made nine years ahead of schedule, was completed Wednesday when Tesla wired $451.8 million to the federal government. Tesla&#8217;s loan was part of the government&#8217;s 2010 Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Program, a $25 billion fund authorized by Congress, signed by President George W. Bush, and awarded under President Obama. The loan program, which was separate from the U.S. auto bailouts to GM and Chrysler under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP), was designed to get fuel-efficient vehicles to consumers faster. (MORE: TIME Tech 40 &#8212; Elon Musk) With its loan payment, made using a portion of the $1 billion it raised last week in a stock and debt offering, Tesla becomes the only American car manufacturer in the DOE program to have fully repaid the government, the company said. &#8220;Today’s repayment is the latest indication that the Energy Department’s portfolio of more than 30 loans is delivering big results for the American economy while costing far less than anticipated,&#8221; U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said in a statement. &#8220;Today, Tesla employs more than 3,000 American workers and is living proof of the power of American innovation.&#8221; The loan repayment is a major victory for Tesla, which was branded as a &#8220;loser&#8221; company by Mitt Romney during his unsuccessful 2012 Republican presidential campaign. &#8220;I would like to thank the Department of Energy and the members of Congress and their staffs that worked hard to create the ATVM program, and particularly the American taxpayer from whom these funds originate,&#8221; Musk said in a statement. &#8220;I hope we did you proud.&#8221; Founded in 2003, Tesla was originally funded entirely with private funds, led by Musk, a billionaire who co-founded PayPal. For many years the company struggled to gain traction, because building a car company from scratch is extremely capital-intensive. As recently as last year, Tesla was still hemorrhaging cash,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80649&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/loser-no-more-tesla-repays-465-million-u-s-loan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Autos</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/autos-companies-industries/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr3fc10.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr3fc10.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr3fc10.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla Motor, speaks at the South by Southwest Interactive festival in Austin</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/60187828ab0bda2734e1a17a173fabde?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">shgustin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>How &#8216;Extreme Couponing&#8217; Is Ruining Coupons</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/how-extreme-couponing-is-ruining-coupons/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/how-extreme-couponing-is-ruining-coupons/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 09:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future of Retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Retail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[couponing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[coupons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double coupons]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[extreme couponer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[extreme couponing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grocery store]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jill Cataldo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kroger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kroger's Ralphs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[supermarket]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walmart]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80453</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It always seemed mind-bogglingly difficult to achieve the kinds of savings portrayed on the TLC show &#8220;Extreme Couponing.&#8221; Thanks to tougher supermarket policies and the proliferation of less valuable coupons, extreme savings through coupons seems downright impossible. The best coupons have two key features: They offer discounts on the products you like and would be buying anyway, and the discounts are substantial enough to justify the time required for clipping them. Increasingly, however, American consumers are coming across coupons that have neither of these features. A NCH Marketing report released earlier this year indicated that there was a 17% drop in coupon redemption in 2012. Among consumers who used fewer coupons last year, the most popular explanation given for the decreasing in couponing was this: “I can’t find coupons for the products I want to buy.” (MORE: Former Extreme Couponer Admits: &#8216;It&#8217;s a Waste of Time&#8217;) What&#8217;s more, it&#8217;s getting more difficult to find coupons that save the shopper a decent chunk of change. In early May, Kroger, one of the world&#8217;s largest supermarket companies, lowered prices on thousands of items in its stores in Virginia, North Carolina, West Virginia, and elsewhere in the Mid-Atlantic region. You&#8217;d expect that news like that would be greeted with applause and gratitude from consumers. Instead, many shoppers have been grumbling that recent changes at Kroger will make them more likely to frequent dollar stores and Walmart—because Kroger&#8217;s price drops were accompanied by a ban on double couponing. The company had previously pulled the plug on double coupons in Texas and California, and spokesman Carl York told the Charleston (W.V.) Gazette that shoppers shouldn&#8217;t expect any stores to double coupons—turning 30¢ off coupon instantly into 60¢ off at the register—down the line. &#8220;I think double coupons is something that&#8217;s going to go away at some point,&#8221; York said. &#8220;The industry is moving away from that.&#8221; Regardless, shoppers have created a Bring Back Doubles Facebook page, and online commenters have been chiming in with observations comparing the move to JC Penney&#8217;s much-hated decision to scale<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80453&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/how-extreme-couponing-is-ruining-coupons/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Saving</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/saving-saving-spending/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/bu002306-e13426289177591.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/bu002306-e13426289177591.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/bu002306-e13426289177591.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Coupons</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Next Real Estate Bubble Has Already Begun (But It&#8217;s Not What You Think)</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/the-next-real-estate-bubble-has-already-begun-but-its-not-what-you-think/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/the-next-real-estate-bubble-has-already-begun-but-its-not-what-you-think/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 09:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Matthews</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy & Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Real Estate]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80612</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The American public is, for obvious reasons, a bit gun-shy when it comes to asset bubbles. Ever since the financial crisis, market watchers have worried about bubbles in the stock market, in high yield debt, and even the reinflation of the real estate bubble. The latest asset class to receive worried attention from policy makers? Farmland. That&#8217;s right, according to The Financial Times prices on U.S. farmland have doubled over the past decade, and are on pace to rise more than 10% again this year, even in the face of weaker grain markets of late. The main force that has been driving the increases in farmland prices has been a steady bull market in agricultural commodity prices. But according to the FT report, lately &#8220;big investors&#8221; have been dipping their toes into the farmland market in an attempt to take advantage of high agriculture profits and as a hedge against inflation. (MORE: The Accounting Trick Behind Thirty Years of Scandal) This run up in prices, combined with the fact that interest rates are at historic lows, have some land owners and policy makers worried that this bull market could end in heartbreak for many of America&#8217;s farmers &#8212; especially in the Midwestern corn belt, where price increases have been most pronounced. The dynamic has gotten the attention of the Federal Advisory Council, a group which advises the Federal Reserve on monetary policy. According to Bloomberg, the council warned the Fed in February that, &#8220;Agricultural land prices are veering further from what makes sense . . Members believe the run-up in agriculture land prices is a bubble resulting from persistently low interest rates.” The effect of a farmland bubble bursting, however, probably shouldn&#8217;t be of much concern to those of us not directly involved in agriculture. As real estate economist Robert Shiller wrote back in 2011, &#8220;farmland is much less important than other speculative assets. For example, U.S. farmland had a total value of $1.9 trillion in 2010, compared with $16.5 trillion for the U.S. stock market and $16.6 trillion for the U.S. housing market.&#8221; Since the value of farmland<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80612&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/23/the-next-real-estate-bubble-has-already-begun-but-its-not-what-you-think/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Real Estate</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/economy-policy/real-estate-economy-policy/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/168780384.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/168780384.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/168780384.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Corn is planted in a field outside in Henry, Ill., U.S., on May 14, 2013.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/8f9a71742e964af96ca58c01a0577a0d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F2.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">christopherrmatthews</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Memorial Day Gas Prices: After Wild Ride, About Where We Were Last Year</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/memorial-day-gas-prices-after-wild-ride-about-where-we-were-last-year/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/memorial-day-gas-prices-after-wild-ride-about-where-we-were-last-year/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 18:27:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Autos]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Energy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[california]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas prices]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gas stations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GasBuddy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gasoline]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[midwest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Minnesota]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80605</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Memorial Day weekend, known not only as a time for hitting the road but also the kickoff to the summer road trip season, has always been regarded as a key moment for gas prices. This year, the national average for a gallon of regular is almost exactly the same as it was for Memorial Day 2012. And yet, for the past two years, the periods leading up to Memorial Day couldn&#8217;t be more different. In 2012 and 2013, the first two months of the year were both marked by increases in prices at the pump, including curiously sharp spikes in February, despite relatively low demand in the marketplace. That&#8217;s when the similarities in 2012 and 2013 gas prices end. In March 2013, trends shifted gears compared to the year before. Gas prices almost never drop during the month of March, and sure enough, they rose swiftly in March 2012. Fast-forward a year later, however, and prices at the pump dipped significantly in March 2013. By early April 2013, the national average was around $3.64, 30¢ cheaper than the year before. Prices continued dropping throughout the month, reaching roughly the $3.50 mark. (MORE: Peak Traffic Ticket Season Is Here: Police Pushed to Give More Seat Belt Citations) More recently, gas prices have been on the rise around the country—and especially in the Midwest and California. Thanks to refinery outages, the statewide average in Minnesota hit $4.27 per gallon this week, an all-time high for the state and the highest average in the Lower 48, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. GasBuddy noted that drivers in North Dakota were also paying all-time highs for gasoline, and much of the Midwest was nearing record high gas prices just in time for Memorial Day. The latest Energy Information Administration report states that the national average jumped roughly 14¢ over the past two weeks, thanks in particular to prices spikes in the Midwest and California, where a gallon of regular jumped 18¢ in two weeks. Around this time last year, by contrast, gas prices were decreasing<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80605&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/memorial-day-gas-prices-after-wild-ride-about-where-we-were-last-year/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Transportation</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/transportation-companies-industries/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Bernanke’s Dilemma: No Good Moves Left</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/bernankes-dilemma-no-good-moves-left/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/bernankes-dilemma-no-good-moves-left/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 17:28:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Sivy</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Austerity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Banking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bonds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economy & Policy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Reserve]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Finance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Investing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stocks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wall Street & Markets]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80573</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There’s a term in chess called zugzwang, which describes the point in a game when it&#8217;s your turn to move but every move you could make would worsen your situation. That’s pretty much what the chessboard looked like for Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke when he testified before Congress this morning. What everyone most wants to know is when the Fed is going to start tapering off its bond-buying program (called Quantitative Easing), which has flooded the banking system with money for the past five years and kept interest rates abnormally low. And that was something Bernanke couldn&#8217;t answer. In his testimony, the Fed chairman gave a carefully hedged commitment that the central bank would continue buying bonds – currently $85 billion a month – until the economy is stronger. And he repeated last December&#8217;s official statement that the Fed intends &#8220;to maintain highly accommodative monetary policy as long as needed to support continued progress toward maximum employment and price stability.&#8221; When asked at what point the bond-buying policy might change, Bernanke was more evasive, saying that the Fed might need a few more meetings to make that decision. Asked if it would be decided by Labor Day, he demurred. Bernanke&#8217;s hedging isn&#8217;t primarily a sign of indecisiveness. His real problem is that given current economic conditions, there aren&#8217;t any good moves he can make. The conventional wisdom – and the presumption behind the Fed&#8217;s current policy – is that the economy is steadily improving, even if progress is slow. And while easy money eventually leads to higher inflation, that threat could still be several years away. So ideally, the Fed&#8217;s stimulus could get the economy back to a normal rate of growth before inflation becomes a problem, at which point the Fed could taper off its bond buying little by little and gracefully exit the picture. (MORE: The Unspeakably Wonky Idea That Can Solve the Corporate Tax Debate) But what if the economy isn&#8217;t getting better, or is improving so sluggishly that it will take years to get back to normal?<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80573&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/bernankes-dilemma-no-good-moves-left/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Federal Reserve</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/economy-policy/federal-reserve-economy-policy/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/169246414.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/169246414.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/169246414.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke at a hearing before the Joint Economic Committee  on Capitol Hill, in Washington, D.C., on May 22, 2013.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/b8875a12f713f52ecc28fe72efed7fd4?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F2.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">michaelsivy</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Theme Park Inflation: Universal Orlando Becomes First to Cross $90 Admission Mark</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/theme-park-inflation-universal-orlando-becomes-first-to-cross-90-admission-mark/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/theme-park-inflation-universal-orlando-becomes-first-to-cross-90-admission-mark/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 13:30:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tourism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Florida]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hotels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orlando]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SeaWorld]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[souvenirs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Orlando]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Studios]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Universal Studios Orlando]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vacation packages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Walt Disney World]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s become an annual springtime tradition. Each year around Memorial Day, some theme park—likely in central Florida—jacks up ticket prices by a few bucks, prompting the competition to follow suit with their own price hikes. This year, like last, it&#8217;s Universal Studios Orlando leading the charge. Toward the end of May 2012, the company raised its single-day admission to $88, up from $85, making Universal Studios Orlando the most expensive theme park in the U.S. Within weeks, Walt Disney World took over that title by boosting its one-day base pass to $89. That&#8217;s the adult price; kids ages 3 to 9 catch a $6 price break, with a $83 single-day ticket. This week, Universal again was out in front of the seasonal ticket price hikes, raising its single-day, single-park adult admission to $92 plus tax. The child one-day ticket now starts at $86. As ThemeParkInsider.com explained, it&#8217;s highly likely that Universal&#8217;s theme park competitors will follow along with their own price hikes, making the argument that right now may be a good time to purchase those Disney admissions passes: History shows that whenever one of the Big Three in Orlando &#8212; Disney, Universal and SeaWorld &#8212; raises prices, at least one of the others follows. So if you&#8217;re on the fence about buying Walt Disney World or SeaWorld Orlando tickets, you might want to hurry up and do it before those parks match Universal&#8217;s increase. (MORE: Is Airlines-Style Variable Pricing Coming to Theme Park Tickets?) More so than ever, the price hikes seem intended to push visitors into buying multi-day theme park passes. The one-day adult admission to a single Universal Studios park is $92, while a two-day pass runs $125.99 and a three-day ticket is $140.99. In other words, if you&#8217;re buying a three-day pass, the second and third days cost a total of $49, or a little over half the price of that first day&#8217;s admission. A four-day pass costs just $10 more than the three-day version. All of the prices above are for passes that allow entrance<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80535&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/theme-park-inflation-universal-orlando-becomes-first-to-cross-90-admission-mark/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Tourism</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/tourism/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>JetBlue Proves There&#8217;s a Reasonable Way to Hit Us With Fees</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/jetblue-proves-theres-a-reasonable-way-to-hit-us-with-fees/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/jetblue-proves-theres-a-reasonable-way-to-hit-us-with-fees/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 12:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Brad Tuttle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Airlines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Companies & Industries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Saving & Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Smart Spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[airline fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[American Airlines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[frequent flier]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JetBlue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[JetBlue Airways]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[loyalty programs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Southwest Airlines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ticket change fees]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TrueBlue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TrueBlue Mosaic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[united airlines]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80551</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You know the drill: An airline hikes its fees, and within seconds travelers vent their outrage in response. JetBlue shows that it doesn&#8217;t have to be this way. When United Airlines raised its ticket change fee to $200 (up from $150) a few weeks ago, the masses grumbled in here-we-go-again exasperation, in full expectation that the competition would follow suit with fee hikes of their own. Sure enough, by early May, Delta, US Airways, and American Airlines had all also boosted their ticket change fees from $150 to $200. Among the holdouts that didn&#8217;t jack up their change fees were Southwest Airlines and JetBlue, the two most fee-adverse carriers, which still allow passengers to check at least one bag free of charge—and which, by no small coincidence, regularly receive the highest ratings in terms of customer satisfaction. As of May 17, however, JetBlue raised its change fees. (MORE: The One Airline That Stubbornly Refuses to Pile on the Fees &#8212; For Now) What&#8217;s more surprising than the fact that JetBlue jacked up its change fees is that hardnosed travel advocates aren&#8217;t hating on the new fees. Brett Snyder, who writes the CrankyFlier blog admits that he &#8220;bashed&#8221; United&#8217;s change fee hike. JetBlue&#8217;s policy changes instead represent the &#8220;right way to increase your change fee,&#8221; Snyder wrote. &#8220;Good work, JetBlue,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;You found a way to increase your change fee in a way that’s more consumer-friendly.&#8221; How can any fee increase be consumer-friendly? Well, in JetBlue&#8217;s case, travelers can at least see that the policy changes make sense compared to what&#8217;s become the industry standard. The $200 fee for changing a ticket with United, American, and the others is a flat charge assessed no matter what the price of the original ticket, and no matter when the passenger is making an itinerary change. These rules strike many travelers as unfair, and perhaps even silly and counterproductive. A traveler who purchased a one-way ticket for, say, $125, and needs to change travel dates has no incentive to report the change to<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80551&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/jetblue-proves-theres-a-reasonable-way-to-hit-us-with-fees/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Airlines</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/companies-industries/airlines-big-companies/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/166067695.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/166067695.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timebusinessblog.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/166067695.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">A JetBlue A320 in Mobile, Ala., on April 8, 2013.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f8de938518e7b986d552694ed99aa54d?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">bradtuttle</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oklahoma&#8217;s Dangerous Dearth of Storm Cellars</title>
		<link>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/oklahomas-dangerous-dearth-of-storm-cellars/</link>
		<comments>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/oklahomas-dangerous-dearth-of-storm-cellars/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 09:45:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Martha C. White</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Real Estate & Homes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://business.time.com/?p=80555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[UPDATED 5/22/13 12:30 pm The deadly tornadoes that struck outside Oklahoma City on Monday have a lot of people asking why there aren&#8217;t more storm cellars and safe rooms in the area, which would have enabled more residents to shelter safely. Glenn Lewis, the mayor of devastated Moore, Oklahoma, said today that he wants to pass a law requiring either tornado shelters or safe rooms in new homes. &#8221;We&#8217;ll try to get it passed as soon as I can,&#8221; he told CNN. In the meantime, however, why were so many area residents unable to flee into a conventional storm cellar or basement as the storm approached? To debunk one popular myth: It’s not that these structures can’t be built in the area. But a combination of market and climatological forces makes them expensive and rare. A key factor behind the dearth of basements in Oklahoma is the region&#8217;s frost line. Structural foundations everywhere need to be set below the depth at which the surrounding ground freezes. In most northern states, that means digging as much as six feet down — and if you’ve already gone to that much effort, you might as well just go ahead and build a basement. In Oklahoma, however, the frost line is only about 18 inches below the earth&#8217;s surface, and since there’s no structural or financial advantage to digging deeper, most builders don’t. “The main issue is cost,&#8221; explains Calvin Taylor, owner of Taylor Concrete Construction in the northeast Oklahoma city of Tahlequah. &#8220;They can go down and put a slab floor down for less.” (PHOTOS: Tornado Flattens Suburb Outside Oklahoma City, Kills Dozens) Then there&#8217;s the unusual quality of the earth itself in parts of Oklahoma. In the northeast part of the state, rocky soil often requires builders to use a jackhammer to dig basement, which is more expensive than the conventional process. Other parts of the state have unusually shallow soil covering sandstone bedrock, which means even more heavy-duty excavation. That can add several hundred to a few thousand dollars onto the cost, says Mike Hancock,<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=business.time.com&#038;blog=31173800&#038;post=80555&#038;subd=timebusinessblog&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://business.time.com/2013/05/22/oklahomas-dangerous-dearth-of-storm-cellars/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Real Estate &amp; Homes</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://business.time.com/category/personal-finance-2/real-estate-homes/</primary_category_link>
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/9a5a9e4f28beb5afb59b1202632d219a?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2F0.gravatar.com%2Favatar%2Fad516503a11cd5ca435acc9bb6523536%3Fs%3D96&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">marthacwhite</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
